[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Adonthell-devel] Shield and Armor Rules

From: Andrew Phillips
Subject: Re: [Adonthell-devel] Shield and Armor Rules
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:02:31 -0800

I think one thing that might be complicating our attempts to arrive at
a sum 1 coverage modifier is the inclusion of the shield. What if all
worn armour has a sum coverage modifier of 1 and shields (as armour
that is carried, but not worn) have their own size/coverage modifier.
A small buckler would have a different coverage modifier than a large
kite shield or tower shield.


On 3/16/06, Andrew Phillips <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > Also, should individual parts of paired armour be individually
> > > equipped? For example, bracers and gloves come in twos. It makes no
> > > sense to split up greaves or boots, but sometimes gloves or greaves
> > > don't come in pairs and don't even -need- to come in pairs. For
> > > example, why wear a bracer on your shield arm?
> >
> > That's true, but I'm not sure whether we should go into such detail. I
> > would add one equipment slot for each of these items, and wouldn't
> > distinguish between ones and pairs.
> You have a good point. In this case, individually equippable bracers,
> or even gloves, would need to be sufficiently powerful to make it
> pointful to wear them individually. But since we're not spitting them
> up, gloves and the like should probably have a single coverage
> modifier. This would make the numbers easier to work out as well.
> > To explain this idea a little more: a inventory is a list of slots.
> > For equipping items, each character will have a special inventory that
> > holds a list of slots named after the type of equipment that fits into
> > this slot. What slots this equipment inventory contains can (easily)
> > be changed at runtime, if necessary. I might have to refine the code a
> > little that is already in place, but the implementation of armour sets
> > based upon this shouldn't pose a big problem.
> >
> Thanks for the clarification. And many of the equippable items will
> have restrictions on them anyway - mostly based on class and
> alignment. For example, monks cannot equip metallic armours. As a
> compensation, I think they should get an automatic +1 agility at first
> level and the ability to train skills and combat feats that increase
> their ability to dodge and parry. These rules, of course, are just a
> proposal.
> Another armour restriction that might make some sense is too tie one's
> move silent ability to the weight of one's armor. For example, if a
> thief, ranger, or even fighter has ranks in move silently, equipping
> half-plate and full plate armours may disable this ability.
> Andrew

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]